WTFDetroit.com

View Full Version : Catholic Priest on Trial for saying Jesus existed



Black Dynamite
01-27-2006, 01:47 PM
I know nothing but meaningless debate will ensue. but all i''l say is WTF??!! and that this is more proof that even atheists have extremist factions. there now im out of this


Judge to Rule on Merit of Christ Case

By MARTA FALCONI, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 4 minutes ago

VITERBO, Italy - An Italian judge heard arguments Friday on whether a small-town parish priest should stand trial for asserting that Jesus Christ existed.

The priest's atheist accuser, Luigi Cascioli, says the Roman Catholic Church has been deceiving people for 2,000 years with a fable that Christ existed, and that the Rev. Enrico Righi violated two Italian laws by reasserting the claim.

Lawyers for Righi and Cascioli, old schoolmates, made their arguments in a brief, closed-door hearing before Judge Gaetano Mautone in Viterbo, north of Rome. They said they expected the judge to decide quickly.

Cascioli filed a criminal complaint in 2002 after Righi wrote in a parish bulletin that Jesus did indeed exist, and that he was born of a couple named Mary and Joseph in Bethlehem and lived in Nazareth.

Cascioli claims that Righi's assertion constituted two crimes under Italian law: so-called "abuse of popular belief," in which someone fraudulently deceives people; and "impersonation," in which someone gains by attributing a false name to a person.

"The point is not to establish whether Jesus existed or not, but if there is a question of possible fraud," Cascioli's attorney, Mauro Fonzo, told reporters before the hearing.

Cascioli says the church has been gaining financially by "impersonating" as Christ someone by the name of John of Gamala, the son of Judas from Gamala.

He has said he has little hope of the case succeeding in overwhelmingly Roman Catholic Italy, but that he is merely going through the necessary legal steps to reach the European Court of Human Rights, where he intends to accuse the church of what he calls "religious racism."

Righi, 76, has stressed substantial historical evidence — both Christian and non-Christian — of Jesus' existence.

"Don Righi is innocent because he said and wrote what he has the duty to say and write," Righi's attorney, Severo Bruno, told reporters.

He said he told Mautone during the hearing that Righi was not asserting a historical fact when he wrote of Jesus' existence, but rather "an expression of theological principles."

"When Don Righi spoke about Christ's humanity ... he was affirming that he needs to be considered as a man. What his name is, where he comes from or who his parents are is secondary," he said.

Fonza said he countered that there have long been questions of Christ's existence and that the matter warranted discussion in the court.

"When somebody states a wrong fact, abusing the ignorance of people, and gains from that, that is one of the gravest crimes," Cascioli told reporters.

Righi's brother, Luigi Righi, attended the hearing and said his brother was "serene but bitter."

___

On the Net:

Cascioli's site:

http://www.luigicascioli.it

Anthony
01-27-2006, 02:40 PM
Are you fucking kidding me! He believes in chirst, what was he suposed to say?





GOD DAMN IT PEOPLE MAKE ME SO FUCKING MAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
[smilie=angryfire.g:

Glenn
01-27-2006, 02:44 PM
At first glance this seems outrageous, but I see some merit to it.








we'll see if Gutz can stay out of this, as he promised

Glenn
01-27-2006, 02:56 PM
You are so fighting the urge, aren't you, Gutz?

Black Dynamite
01-27-2006, 03:03 PM
~belch~ and LOL

Glenn
01-27-2006, 03:04 PM
I officially declare victory.

Koolaid
01-27-2006, 03:25 PM
This is a stupid lawsuit.

Jesus did exist, he was a real person. The proof of Jesus being alive, and then crucified is well documented in historical artifacts. You can believe what you want about him being the son of god, however to say he didn't exist as a person is straight up ignorant.

It's dumb on many levels beyond that as well though. If you can sue a guy for preaching of christ's existence could you sue every other religion too? Considering there's new cult religions out now that have just created their own gods and got paid for them I don't see why Christianity should be singled out. If you're going to eliminate the right of someone to preach what he believes then you should do it equal around the board (and then see how long it takes for someone to kill you).

what if some crazy bum was begging for change to ask iffytah the god of neptune for forgiveness for eating twinkies? could you sue him too?

These guys are incredibly pathetic.

DennyMcLain
01-28-2006, 08:57 PM
...Lawyers for Righi and Cascioli, old schoolmates...


I bet that's code for "old gay lovers". Obviously, somebody is a little jaded, here.